Artistic conflict and its types. Conflict as a driving force for plot development

ST. PETERSBURG STATE

ACADEMY OF THEATER ARTS

Department of Television Directing

Workshop of Professor V.D. Soshnikova

Teachers: G.A. Nikitina, D.S. Estrin

Theoretical work on the discipline: “Directing”

On the topic: “The main conflict and the main series of events in theatrical productions and in screen works»

Performed:

1st year student

Ivanova S.A

Saint Petersburg

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….3

Chapter 1: The concept of the main conflict………………………………..…4

Chapter 2: Types of conflicts………………………...…………………….……6

Chapter 3: The concept of an event. Main sequence of events…………………..8

Chapter 4: Identification of the conflict and construction of the event series in the film “Anna Karenina”…. ……14

Chapter 5: Identification of the conflict and construction of the event series in Gorky’s play “At the Depths”.……..14

Conclusion………………………….…………….…….....…….…...…….…16

Introduction.

In my work I want to explore the concept of the main conflict, the main event and learn how to build a series of events. I have to master the Stanislavsky method, which is based on a deep knowledge of the laws of drama and the laws of psychophysical actions of actors. This method makes it possible to correctly penetrate into the diversity and diversity of any literary work. I will try to analyze the works of the great playwright Ostrovsky, Zachry’s film adaptation of “Anna Karenina” based on the work of Leo Tolstoy and M. Gorky’s play “At the Depths”

I am confident that my understanding of the main conflict, the initial event, etc., will differ from the long-established key concepts in these plays. But this will be my vision and my interpretation of the work I read or saw. Therefore, I am not afraid to start analysis for fear of making mistakes. After all, different definitions of the initial event are reflected in the director’s understanding of the play as a whole. I will try to study the method of defining the above concepts as accurately as possible so that my analysis will be as close as possible to the understanding of the play of such great figures as K.S. Stanislavsky and G.A. Tovstonogov.

M.O. Knebel writes: “Although we define the events that exist in the play as an objective reality, by selecting them we necessarily introduce a subjective element... That’s the point, that’s the point of defining events, that each director brings into this process what “It’s especially dear and interesting to him as an artist.”

The concept of the main conflict

Before defining the main conflict, you need to understand what conflict is in general. What is the nature of the conflict? Where are its roots? And how to detect it? Where is the main conflict? Where is the secondary one? I want to find answers to these questions in this chapter.

Conflict - from lat. ñonflictus (“clash”). The development of our life occurs as a result of the struggle of opposites, their collision. That is, this struggle arises due to the collision of opposing forces that perform actions in relation to each other. Therefore, conflict is a clash of opposing forces.

In the play, each hero wants something, strives for something and performs actions, which is expressed in the through action of the hero. For conflict to arise in a play, it is necessary that what one wants meets obstacles from the other. Through action meets counter through action. A continuous duel can only arise between “crossing forces.” The main forces in the play are personified in specific characters, so often the conversation about the conflict is conducted primarily from the point of view of analyzing the behavior of a particular character.

G.A. Tovstonogov said that “... the essence of Stanislavsky’s method lies in the fact that every minute, every second stage action there is a continuous duel. The director needs to remember that there is no stage life out of conflict..."

There may be several conflicts in a play between different characters, forces, parties. And as Tovstonogov said: “Having built a chain of events, you need to discover in them that consistent chain of conflicts from which action arises.” Consequently, any conflict event must necessarily involve several, at least two, characters. The conflict that motivates them to act is the main conflict of the play. Also, all the other characters in the play will be involved in their actions.

Now, let’s formulate the concept of the main conflict. The main conflict is a sharp, extremely intense struggle of opposing views, in which all participants in the play are involved. If someone isn't on either side or doesn't know what's going on because it doesn't concern them, that would be a suggested circumstance for the hero group. The basis for this conflict is provided by the aspirations of the characters in the play, or rather, the contradiction of aspirations.

From the point of view of directing, conflict is the basis of that very notorious action, which is the only truthful way to translate a play on stage, without which, according to Stanislavsky, there is no performance.

How to understand where the main conflict is, and where the secondary one is, and even the proposed circumstances? In the selection of main conflicts there should be the following principle: it is necessary to check each time what is the cause and what is the effect. The major, main conflict of the play should be considered those facts that are the cause, not the effect.

I would like to note that the main conflict appears from the initial event, but it is most fully revealed as a result of the final event. The conflict grows and develops until the very end. Naturally, the final event, which most fully reveals the essence of both the main conflict and the ideas of the play, and its stylistic features, must be located at the end of the play.

Let's look at Ostrovsky's play "Dowry" and identify the main conflict of the play. In my opinion, this is a conflict between humanity and the “Bryakhimov laws of life”, which exclude humanity. It ended with the victory of “Bryakhomov”.

Larisa was the expression of “humanity.” She fights the greedy world of Bryakhimov. Her death is a logical resolution of the conflict, not in her favor. And it is no coincidence that the author first kills Larisa morally (when she agrees to go to Knurov for support), and then only physically.

Larisa is the main character of the play, who strives to escape from the “Bryakhimov life”. This end-to-end effect the main character encounters confrontation (counter-through action) from other participants in the play, such as Karandyshev. He is trying to keep her here by marrying her. This is where the main conflict of worldviews occurs.

Types of conflicts.

There are several types of conflict, divided into: internal and external according to where they originate: in the character’s soul or between characters.

Internal type conflict:

Conflict within a person (with himself). For example, between reason and feeling; duty and conscience; desire and morality; consciousness and subconsciousness; personality and individuality; essence and existence, etc.

Important in literary work has a conflict.

Conflict

Conflict is a contradiction, clash (collision) between groups of characters or individual characters depicted in a work, the hero and society (environment), confrontation of characters, ideas, moods.

The most clearly opposing forces in the work are presented in the images of Dikoy, Kabanikha, Feklushi, on the one hand, Katerina and Kuligin, on the other. At the same time, the main conflict of “The Thunderstorm”, its development depends on private conflicts subordinate to the main one: Katerina - Kabanikha, Katerina - Tikhon, Kuligin - Dikoy, Boris - Dikoy, etc.

Conflicts are generated by certain socio-political, historical, everyday conditions, differences in the characters of the heroes, their life situation and views. That's why this or that piece of art characterized by a kind of conflict.

There are different conflicts:

a) social - clash of interests of certain social groups. For example, in the novel by N. G. Chernyshevsky “What is to be done?” the confrontation between “old” (“vulgar”) and “new” people, that is, people with bourgeois-philistine views on life (Rozalskaya, Storeshnikov, Julie, etc.), and people preparing to build a new, truly human, socialist society, which “bright and beautiful” (Rakhmetov, Lopukhov, Kirsanov, Vera Pavlovna);

b) moral - so, in the novel by V. P. Astafiev “The Sad Detective” the conflict lies in the clash of the main character - operative Leonid Soshnin, a kind, conscientious person- with the world around us, in which moral standards have shifted, ethical rules have been forgotten;

c) psychological - the struggle of contradictory thoughts and feelings in the soul of an individual. For example, the motive for the behavior of the hero of V. G. Rasputin’s story “Live and Remember,” who deserted from Guskov’s army, becomes the constant fear of exposure, the fear of death;

d) philosophical - for example, the dispute between Jesus Christ and Pontius Pilate in Ch. Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold”;

e) socio-historical - thus, the clash between Chatsky and Famusovka Moscow, a man of progressive convictions - with an inert, unspiritual, unprincipled social environment appears in Griboedov as a conflict of the main tendencies and forces opposing in Russian history;

f) the conflict of good and evil, enlightenment and ignorance (in the works of classicism, for example in “The Minor” by D. I. Fonvizin);

g) intimate-personal - the struggle between personal desires and public duty. For example, in the character of Andriy from N.V. Gogol’s story “Taras Bulba” there is a conflict between love for the Motherland and love for a woman;

h) conflict between character and circumstances. For example, the attitude of the heroes of A.P. Chekhov’s play to the fate of the cherry orchard;

i) conflict of characters, that is, heroes belonging to the same social environment, but different in character. For example, the clash between Troekurov and old Dubrovsky or between Grinev and Shvabrin;

j) a conflict between opposing parties of the same nature. For example, the struggle in Katerina’s soul between a passionate impulse for personal freedom and happiness and her own ideas about morality, formed under the influence of the “dark kingdom,” in particular the religiously conscious law of marital duty.

Conflicts can also be industrial, family and household, ethical, religious, between “fathers” and “children”, etc.

The presence of conflict is one of the most important conditions drama in which life's contradictions are revealed with particular tension.

The conflict directly develops in the plot and composition. The development of the conflict forms the basis of the plot in a literary work and determines its composition.

Significant changes to the composition, plot development drama, A.P. Chekhov and M. Gorky contributed to its stage movement (each in his own way). Their plays feature new characters, new types, and if representatives of the old ones also appear social groups and classes, then they are revealed differently. Symbolic, allegorical, associative subtext is included in the fabric of the play, and the accompaniment (song, music, noise) is significantly enhanced.

In “The Cherry Orchard” and “At the Bottom” we do not see a consistent development of the plot with traditional components - exposition and plot. The plays begin immediately with action, and in the process of stage movement, each character reveals himself “on his own”, through actions, attitude towards other persons, events, and his own speech.

The first acquaintance with the main characters occurs immediately, in the opening scenes. Attention is paid not only to the system of images, but also to the genre characteristics and the complicated plot and compositional structure of these works.

Each play by A.P. Chekhov and M. Gorky was innovative in its own way. Special role the denouement plays in them: namely final scenes, as a rule, help determine the idea of the work and clarify the author’s position.

Let us note the originality of the composition of “The Cherry Orchard”. In the center are not heroes or events, but a garden to which different attitude characters, their experiences relate to the garden.

One story line associated with the nobility leaving the scene (Ranevskaya, Gaev and their entourage) and the bourgeoisie that came to replace it in the person of Lopakhin. This conflict is resolved in favor of the triumphant Lopakhin, “ beast of prey", as defined by Petya Trofimov. Another storyline: the romantic dream of the young heroes collides with the practicality of Lopakhin, by whose will a wonderful cherry orchard is cut down. “All of Russia is our garden” - this is the dream of Petya and Anya.

The original composition organically merges with genre originality plays. Why is the play called a lyrical comedy? Firstly, comedy requires comic situations and comic characters. (Here it is Charlotte, Yasha, Epikhodov, Simeonov-Pishchik.) Secondly, the most important element dramatic genre is pathos. The pathos of this play is not dramatic, but comic-lyrical. One constantly feels the presence of the author, his mocking, sometimes compassionate-sad attitude towards the characters.

The individualization of the speech of characters, for example Gaev, is masterfully used. The technique of parody is one of the most important elements of comedy. Lackey Yasha is an expressive and vivid parody. Originality, unique flavor Chekhov's plays creates a subtext - a second meaning, a second sound of a phrase, which the author subtly puts into the mouths of his characters, into the musical and noise design.

In the play " The Cherry Orchard"lyrical sadness, experiences, memories are enhanced by the accompaniment. The antique cabinet unlocks with a clang; early in the morning Varya listens to the singing of starlings coming from the garden; The company's constant companion is the guitar played by Epikhodov. Then we will hear the sound of a broken string. At night we hear the howling of the wind and the sound of the watchman's beater.

People not only dance and cry to the orchestra, they also enter the ancient estates of the nobles to the music. new owner- merchant Lopakhin. And finally, we hear the sound of an axe. The cherry orchard is being cut down. Accompaniment is the most important element of the play's psychologism. It helps to enhance the corresponding mood. Stage directions are of particular importance in the play.

Thus, we see that the play “The Cherry Orchard” is original and innovative in genre, plot, composition, and in the ways of revealing characters. Analysis of these sides dramatic work will give students the opportunity to comprehend the well-known turn in drama at the beginning of the 20th century, to understand artistic construction plays in a “new key”.

Introduction to literary criticism (N.L. Vershinina, E.V. Volkova, A.A. Ilyushin, etc.) / Ed. L.M. Krupchanov. - M, 2005

Conflict is a contradiction, clash (collision) between groups of characters or individual characters depicted in a work, the hero and society (environment), confrontation of characters, ideas, moods.

The conflict finds expression in the struggle between the new and the old, the social and the antisocial. Thus, in A. N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm,” the main conflict is an acute contradiction between the outdated principles of house-building life and progressive aspirations for the free manifestation of natural human rights; a sharp collision of social routine, spiritual enslavement, inertia, ignorance with human dignity, educational and democratic views. The most clearly opposing forces in the work are presented in the images of Dikoy, Kabanikha, Feklushi, on the one hand, Katerina and Kuligin, on the other. At the same time, the main conflict of “The Thunderstorm”, its development depends on private conflicts subordinate to the main one: Katerina - Kabanikha, Katerina - Tikhon, Kuligin - Dikoy, Boris - Dikoy, etc.

Conflicts are generated by certain socio-political, historical, living conditions, differences in the characters of the characters, their life situation and views. That is why this or that work of art is distinguished by a kind of conflict.

There are different conflicts:

a) social – clash of interests of certain social groups. For example, in novel II. G. Chernyshevsky "What to do?" the confrontation between “old” (“vulgar”) and “new” people, i.e. people with bourgeois-philistine views on life (Rozalskaya, Storeshnikov, Julie, etc.), and people preparing to build a new, truly human, socialist society that is “bright and beautiful” (Rakhmetov, Lopukhov, Kirsanov, Vera Pavlovna);
b) moral - for example, in V. P. Astafiev’s novel “The Sad Detective” the conflict lies in the clash of the main character - operative Leonid Soshnin, a kind, conscientious person - with the world around him, in which moral standards have shifted, ethical rules have been consigned to oblivion;
c) psychological - the struggle of contradictory thoughts and feelings in the soul of an individual. For example, the motive for the behavior of the hero of V. G. Rasputin’s story “Live and Remember” - Guskov, who deserted from the army - becomes a constant fear of exposure, fear of death;
d) philosophical – for example, the dispute between Jesus Christ and Pontius Pilate in Ch. Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold”;
e) socio-historical - thus, the clash between Chatsky and Famusov’s Moscow, a man of progressive convictions - with an inert, unspiritual, unprincipled social environment appears in Griboyedov as a conflict of the main tendencies and forces opposing in Russian history;
f) the conflict of good and evil, enlightenment and ignorance (in the works of classicism, for example, in “The Minor” by D. I. Fonvizin);
g) intimate-personal – the struggle between personal desires and public duty. For example, in the character of Andriy from N.V. Gogol’s story “Taras Bulba” there is a conflict between love for the Motherland and love for a woman;
h) conflict between character and circumstances. For example, the attitude of the heroes of A.P. Chekhov’s play to the fate of the cherry orchard;
i) conflict of characters, i.e. heroes belonging to the same social environment, but different in character. For example, the clash between Troekurov and old Dubrovsky or between Grinev and Shvabrin;
j) a conflict between opposing parties of the same nature. For example, the struggle in Katerina’s soul between a passionate impulse for personal freedom and happiness and her own ideas about morality, formed under the influence of the “dark kingdom,” in particular the religiously conscious law of marital duty.

Conflicts can also be industrial, family, ethical, religious, between “fathers” and “children”, etc.

The conflict is expressed most clearly and acutely in a dramatic work. The conflict in the play is the spring that drives the action and forces one to show character (for example, the main engine of the stage action of N.V. Gogol’s comedy “The Inspector General” is the fear of the “owners” of the city before the inspector). The presence of conflict is one of the most important conditions for drama, in which life’s contradictions are revealed with particular tension.

The conflict directly develops in the plot and composition. The development of the conflict forms the basis of the plot in a literary work and determines its composition.

Significant changes to the composition, plot development of the drama, and its stage movement were made by A.P. Chekhov and M. Gorky (each in his own way). Their plays feature new characters, new types, and if representatives of former social groups and classes appear, they are revealed differently. Symbolic, allegorical, associative subtext is included in the fabric of the play, and the accompaniment (song, music, noise) is significantly enhanced. In “The Cherry Orchard” and “At the Bottom” we do not encounter a consistent development of the plot with traditional components - exposition and plot. The plays begin immediately with action, and in the process of stage movement, each character reveals himself “on his own”, through actions, attitude towards other persons, events, and his own speech. The first acquaintance with the main characters occurs immediately, in the opening scenes. Attention is paid not only to the system of images, but also to the genre characteristics and the complicated plot and compositional structure of these works. Each play by A.P. Chekhov and M. Gorky was innovative in its own way. The denouement plays a special role in them: it is the final scenes that, as a rule, help determine the idea of the work and clarify the position of the author.

Let us note the originality of the composition “The Cherry Orchard”. In the center are not heroes or events, but a garden, to which the different attitudes of the characters are manifested; their experiences are correlated with the garden.

One storyline is associated with the nobility leaving the stage (Ranevskaya, Gaev and their entourage) and the bourgeoisie that came to replace it in the person of Lopakhin. This conflict is resolved in favor of the triumphant Lopakhin, a “beast of prey,” as defined by Petya Trofimov. Another storyline: the romantic dream of the young heroes collides with the practicality of Lopakhin, by whose will a wonderful cherry orchard is cut down. “All of Russia is our garden” - this is the dream of Petya and Anya.

The original composition organically merges with the genre originality of the play. Why is the play called a lyrical comedy? Firstly, comedy requires comic situations and comic characters. (Here these are Charlotte, Yasha, Epikhodov, Simeonov-Pishchik.) Secondly, the most important element of the dramatic genre is pathos. The pathos of this play is not dramatic, but comic-lyrical. One constantly feels the presence of the author, his mocking, sometimes compassionate-sad attitude towards the characters.

The individualization of the speech of characters, for example Gaev, is masterfully used. The technique of parody is one of the most important elements of comedy. Lackey Yasha is an expressive and vivid parody. The originality and unique flavor of Chekhov's plays creates a subtext - a second meaning, a second sound of a phrase, which the author subtly puts into the mouths of his characters, into the musical and noise design.

In the play "The Cherry Orchard" lyrical sadness, experiences, and memories are enhanced by the accompaniment. The antique cabinet unlocks with a clang; early in the morning Varya listens to the singing of starlings coming from the garden; The company's constant companion is the guitar played by Epikhodov. Then we will hear the sound of a broken string. At night we hear the howling of the wind and the sound of the watchman's beater. They not only dance and cry to the orchestra, but to the music a new owner, the merchant Lopakhin, enters the ancient estates of the nobles. And finally we hear the sound of an axe. The cherry orchard is being cut down. Accompaniment is the most important element of the play’s psychologism. It helps to enhance the corresponding mood. Stage directions are of particular importance in the play.

Thus, we see that the play “The Cherry Orchard” is original and innovative in genre, plot, composition, and in the ways of revealing characters. An analysis of these aspects of a dramatic work will enable students to comprehend the well-known turn in dramaturgy at the beginning of the 20th century and to understand the artistic construction of the play in a “new key.”

100 RUR bonus for first order

Select job type Graduate work Course work Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem Solving Business Plan Answers to Questions Creative work Essay Drawing Works Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work Online help

Find out the price

In 1833, in Boldino, Pushkin painted the Bronze Horseman. Author's definition genre - St. Petersburg story.

The work outlines two plans: the actions of Peter and the fate of Eugene. And this helps the poet show complex connection between history and modernity.

The style of the poem has two main principles: a solemn ode and a humble elegy.

The poem opens with an introduction in which the intonations of an ode sound. They outline a historical perspective, since the center of the story is the hundred-year history of the city, which embodies the genius of Peter. The city, built among dark forests and swamps, symbolizes Russia, which is undergoing new changes.

In the main part of the poem, Pushkin dramatically changes the subject of the image; the narrative focuses on the life of a private person. His personal drama is carried out against the backdrop real event modern times - the devastating flood of 1824. Element, defeated by man, did not reconcile for long and at the first opportunity takes revenge on him. However, the victim is not the one who defeated her, but small man, whose goal is home, love and happiness. This denotes the collision of the personal and the universal, the particular and the historical. A philosophical issues becomes the semantic center of the poem.

(1833). Pushkin gave the poem the subtitle “ Petersburg story", meaning not only a story in verse in the spirit of Byron's poems, but also the tradition of prosaic life writing. In the circle of the story, Pushkin introduced many literary sources, one way or another referring the reader to the “anti-Petrine” poem by A. Mickiewicz “Dziady”, to the essay by K.N. Batyushkov “Walks to the Academy of Arts”, to the idylls of N.I. Gnedich “Fishermen” and A.F. Voeikov “The First Navigator” and others.

The time of action in the poem is history (St. Petersburg does not exist yet and its construction is just being planned) and modernity (flood during the reign of Alexander I). The space of the poem either expands, covering vast expanses, or narrows to St. Petersburg, a small island and even a modest house.

At the center of the poem are several episodes that constitute the central conflict between the peaceful and rebellious elements, on the one hand, and its formidable tamer Peter I, on the other; between the huge empire, personified in the monument to the autocrat, and the poor insignificant official, an almost invisible person.

The conflict takes on an insoluble, tragic character, because, unlike the poem “Angelo” that was being written at the same time, there is no place for mercy in it. Therefore, reconciliation of the elements, state and private interests is impossible: the parties are hostile to each other and cannot find agreement. This is manifested even at the genre level: the “Introduction” to the poem, where the background of events is given and the grandiose state plan of the tsar is revealed, is designed mainly in an odic vein, since the ode is a lyrical genre symbol of the Peter the Great era with its idea of statehood. The “Introduction” solemnly glorifies the transformative activity of Peter the Great, who entered into a dispute with the elements. In the description of the elements, two motives dominate: element and order. The peaceful element is chaotic, there is no order and no civilization in it, it is formless, poor and wretched. Peter’s plan against this background is obvious: to give shape, harmony, order to the elements, to civilize life, to build a shield city, a threat city, and to solve state problems of both internal and external nature. And now the elements are defeated.

If you follow what happened before the city was built and after, it is easy to establish several important motives: instead of formlessness - harmony and order, instead of poverty and poverty - wealth, instead of darkness - light, instead of desert - revival, instead of ugliness - beauty, instead decrepit eternity - blooming youth.

After comparative description change Pushkin sings the anthem creative genius Petra (“I love you, Petra’s creation...”), again highlighting the main, decisive qualities of the new capital of the empire: its national significance as the military capital of a great power, harmony, severity and orderliness of forms, beauty (“monotonous beauty”), triumph of civilization above the elements, space above chaos.

The “Introduction” is compositionally contrasted with two parts in which the plot of the “St. Petersburg story” unfolds. Sublime pathos gives way to a “sad story”; instead of an ode, a sad story appears about the fate of the poor young official Eugene.

Eugene (“insignificant”, prosaic hero) as a private person is given in the clash with the Bronze Horseman (“great”, epic hero), a monument to Peter I, which personifies the state power of the empire. Eugene is no longer opposed by Peter the reformer, but by the autocratic order, the symbol of which is the bronze statue (“Idol on a Bronze Horse”). Private person and the symbol of the state - these are the poles of Pushkin’s story.

In the "Introduction" Peter I appears first as a nameless and then as a deceased sovereign who has accomplished his feat. At the end of the first part, he appears before Eugene in the form of a motionless Horseman. In the second part, the statue comes to life and, leaving the pedestal, pursues its distraught “antagonist” on a “ringing galloping horse.”

The appearance of Peter I from the “Introduction” to the finale of the poem changes - it loses human features and becomes more and more impersonal: first the living “he”, then the deceased Peter I, then the Horseman, “an idol on a bronze horse”, “a proud idol” and, finally, a fantastic vision - a statue coming to life.

Unlike Peter I, who appears increasingly impersonal, in Eugene, on the contrary, the personal principle gradually emerges more clearly. Initially, Evgeniy is an “insignificant” person. His horizons are limited by everyday concerns, he is annoyed that he is poor, that he must “with labor... provide himself with both independence and honor; That God could give him more intelligence and money.” Then he indulges in dreams of marriage and family. He does not think about why his family has fallen into decay, why he is destined for the inconspicuous fate of a person who seems to have fallen out of national history. His thoughts are connected with patriarchal morals and customs, with patriarchal fate. He has not yet separated himself from the patriarchal whole. However, the rebellious elements force him to talk about these topics. Evgeniy was afraid that his dreams of a quiet and modest life with Parasha and his children were not destined to come true, that the elements threatened their very existence. Having crossed to the island where Parasha lived, Evgeniy is convinced that she died and the dilapidated house was demolished. Eugene’s mind can’t stand it, and he, distraught, leaves his apartment and wanders through the streets and squares of the capital. Here, for the first time, perhaps, he thought about the structure of existence in general.

or all ours

And life is nothing like an empty dream,

The mockery of heaven over earth?

A man woke up in him, thinking about his fate in the world and about human destiny in the universe. These reflections go far beyond the boundaries of patriarchal existence. As a person, Evgeniy begins to think of himself separately from the world as a whole, opposing his privacy being. This is the awakening of personality, the formation of personal consciousness.

Evgeniy, having experienced the collapse of his hopes for quiet patriarchal-idyllic family happiness, fell into confusion: is it really human life worthless? Is she really just a dream or a mockery of the sky above the earth? It cannot be that the world created by God rests on such inhuman foundations. But if God is not to blame, then who is? These “terrible thoughts” tore Eugene’s heart and mind. He could not decide whether God was to blame for predetermining the fate of humanity and, therefore, in his private destiny or not. However, the structure of being as such is too abstract to declare it an enemy and begin a serious dispute with it. Eugene is not a demon who comes into conflict with God. He tries to explain his personal grief with social reasons. He needs a specific carrier of the threat, to whom direct accusations could be addressed. And then the monument to Peter I appeared before the hero’s eyes. In the outlines of the bronze statue, Eugene recognized the ruler who had previously sacrificed the poor hero to history and doomed his, Eugene’s, private life to misfortune. Eugene saw in the figure with his back turned to him the appearance of Peter, but not his sculptural face, not the personal, human principle, but the principle hostile to the hero - the state, impersonal and super-personal, personified in the statue of the “miraculous builder.”

The rebellious element that destroyed Eugene's dreams of happiness subsided in the city, but overflowed into Eugene's soul, filling it with itself. Just as the elements struck the city built by Peter, so Eugene, overwhelmed by rebellion, “remembered vividly... the past horror” and found himself “suddenly” again behind the statue of Peter. This is how the culprit of Evgeniy’s unfortunate fate was found.

The paradox of the “truth” revealed to Eugene was that it was precisely the reasonable but cruel will of Peter, who founded the city and curbed the elements with order, that seems to Eugene the cause of his misfortune. He blames not the elements that struck the city, but Peter the Builder, who autocratically tamed the chaos. But chaos and space are two forces of equal magnitude: it is impossible to forever prevail over the elements, which means that the intelligent plan of Peter I was not free from madness - arbitrariness, monarchical caprice and cruelty. Evgeniy now intuitively felt all this, opposing himself to a specific bearer of an evil will for him. He had finally found his impersonal enemy.

In Eugene himself, the personal principle reached its apogee and became exhausted, destroyed, turning into madness. “As if possessed by black power,” he challenges the face of “the ruler of half the world,” and this, of course, contains a protest not only against the “builder of the miraculous” St. Petersburg, but also against the state he built, for which a person, an individual, is nothing or something, not taken into account by the sovereign. However, Eugene's rebellion is not comparable to the rebellion of the elements: the power of chaos is irresistible until its impulse subsides. Eugene’s rebellion, reminiscent of a rebellion of the elements and caused by the turmoil and chaos born in his head, is pitiful, brief and stopped in the bud, without having time to unfold. Eugene dies ingloriously, destroyed, with a clouded mind.

The gap between the interests of the private individual and the state is central problem poems. There was a time when these interests coincided. In the “Introduction,” Pushkin, in an odic tonality, sang of the temporary reconciliation of interests under the auspices of the autocratic state. The construction of the city was a national matter for all of Russia - not only for the Tsar, but for every person. The greatness of Peter - the architect of the new state - remains unshaken for Pushkin. But the progressive meaning of its construction turns out to be the death of a poor person who has the right to happiness and life under the conditions of an autocratic empire. This is one of the contradictions of history: the necessary and good transformative activity is carried out mercilessly and cruelly, becoming a terrible reproach to the entire cause of transformation and not redeemed by the sin of the authorities.

Pushkin left the interests of the warring parties unreconciled. There is no direct resolution of the conflict in the poem. Each side puts forward weighty reasons in favor of its position, but each of the positions is incomplete and does not contain the whole truth. According to the poet, “equal-sized” truths can come to agreement in the course of history, which itself naturally will resolve the contradictions between them, but not in favor of one of them, but in the name of an immeasurably higher goal - the desire to rise above both “equal-sized” truths and above the “cruel age”.

Poem " Bronze Horseman" appealed to the understanding that Russia's national interests lie in attracting simple hearts to the construction of the state, that state interests must coincide with the interests of unnoticed private people. State goals, no matter how great they may be, cannot ignore humanity, protection, respect human dignity and disregard the life of every person. Pushkin's poem in the context of his works of the 1830s indirectly confirmed his idea of mercy and humanity as principles of state policy that raise both the government and the private person to the level of higher spirituality.

The end of it all creative development Pushkin from the beginning of his poetic activity until the 1830s there was a novel in verse “Eugene Onegin”.

In “Woe from Wit” two types of conflict can be distinguished: a private, traditional comedy love affair, in which Chatsky, Sophia, Molchalin and Liza are drawn, and a public one (the clash of the “present century” and the “past century”, that is, Chatsky with the inertia social environment- “Famus” society). Thus, the basis of comedy is love drama and the social tragedy of Chatsky, which, of course, cannot be perceived separately from each other (one determines and conditions the other). Since the times of classicism, unity of action, that is, a strict cause-and-effect relationship of events and episodes, has been considered mandatory in drama. In “Woe from Wit” this connection is noticeably weakened. The external action in Griboyedov’s play is not expressed so clearly: it seems that nothing particularly significant happens in the course of the comedy. This is due to the fact that in “Woe from Wit” the dynamics and tension of dramatic action are created through the transmission of thoughts and feelings central characters, especially Chatsky. Comedies of writers of the late XVIII - early XIX centuries ridiculed certain vices: ignorance, arrogance, bribery, blind imitation foreign. “Woe from Wit” is a bold satirical denunciation of the entire conservative way of life: careerism reigning in society, bureaucratic inertia, martinetry, cruelty towards serfs, ignorance. The formulation of all these problems is primarily related to the depiction of the Moscow nobility, the “Famus” society. Close-up Famusov is an ardent defender of the existing regime; in the image of Skalozub, the careerism of the military environment and Arakcheev’s soldiery are branded; Molchalin, who begins his official service, is obsequious and unprincipled. Thanks to episodic figures (Gorichi, Tugoukhovsky, Khryumin, Khlestova, Zagoretsky), the Moscow nobility appears, on the one hand, as multifaceted and colorful, and on the other hand, it is shown as a united social camp, ready to defend its interests. Image Famusov society consists not only of persons brought on stage, but also of numerous off-stage characters who are only mentioned in monologues and remarks (the author of “exemplary nonsense” Foma Fomich, the influential Tatyana Yuryevna, the serf-theater, Princess Marya Aleksevna, etc.).

Is A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” modern?

“How to compare and see

The present century and the past century...”

(A.S. Griboyedov)

There are brilliant works of literature. And there are brilliant names of brilliant works. Those in which the words that make them up seem to merge into one concept. Because this is not just a title literary composition, but the name of some phenomenon. Such titles, such works, even in great literature there will be hardly more than a dozen. Griboedov's comedy is one of them.

Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov turned two hundred years old. Of the incompletely established dates of his miraculous birth, one has been chosen, and now we are celebrating! The Famusovs are in the boxes, the Skalozubs got promoted to generals, Sophia and Liza delight the eyes of the ranks social movement"Women of Russia", the Molchalins are blissful in ministries and committees. Who are the judges? ... There is no play more lively and modern than "Woe from Wit." So it was, so it is, so it will be. A truly great work, such as “Woe from Wit,” resists revaluation. There is no escaping the fact that Griboyedov was closely connected with the Decembrists. Another thing is that our understanding of Decembrism as a social movement has become more precise over the years. We are more clearly aware of some of the tragic features of the Russian public life, especially the centuries-old traditions of totalitarianism. This explains a lot about national history, right up to the present day. It is important for us that “Woe from Wit” is not a “black and white” satire on social order. The writer was not interested in the “system”, not the “system”, but social Psychology. But it is not “black and white” at all. Listen: Famusov and Chatsky often talk about the same thing. “And all the Kuznetsky Bridge, and the eternal French!” - Famusov grumbles. And Chatsky is concerned “so that our smart, cheerful people, even in language, do not consider us to be Germans.” Both of them are unconditional patriots, both are Russian people to the depths of their souls, much divides them, but much makes them similar, that is the tragedy of this comedy, that is why there are “a million torments.” And “system”, “system” - well, they can change, but Famusov, Repetilov, Molchalin, Skalozub are eternal. And Chatsky is eternal. When we are in last time Have you seen Chatsky alive? It was Academician Sakharov. Different time, age, appearance, language, but the essence is the same: Chatsky! The same one whom Pushkin condescendingly reproached, claiming that in “Woe from Wit” there is only one clever man- Griboedov himself, and Chatsky is a kind fellow who spent some time in his company and makes smart speeches in his voice - to whom? Before the Skalozubs and Tugoukhovskys? But the fact of the matter is that Pushkin is not entirely right: it is necessary to speak. To those with whom history has brought you together. Without even expecting understanding. What is said will not be lost. Griboyedov convinced of this. Sakharov convinced him of this. What do these two Russian people have in common, besides the fact that they are Russian? Mind. Both of them were outstanding minds of their time.

The inexhaustibility of “Woe from Wit” is revealed in the misunderstood Chatsky and the unsolved Repetilov...

How to compare and see

The present century and the past...

Which Russian hasn’t found his age to be the most incredible? It seems that both Pushkin and Griboedov more than once had to hear the usual complaints about time, otherwise there would be so many of them different heroes, like Famusov and Duke, would not have lamented so unanimously: “A terrible century! You don’t know what to start…” says Famusov. And the Duke echoes him: “Terrible age, terrible hearts!”

“Woe from Wit” has long been a national property. Back in the early seventies of the nineteenth century, I.A. Goncharov, who noted that comedy “is distinguished by its youthfulness, freshness and stronger vitality from other works of the word,” predicted it “an imperishable life,” argued that it “will survive many more eras, and everything will not lose its vitality.” This prophecy was completely justified.

Great Comedy and now remains youthful and fresh. She kept hers public importance, its satirical salt, its artistic charm. She continues her triumphant march across theater stages. It is taught in schools.

Millions of people laugh and are indignant along with Griboedov. The anger of the satirist-accuser is close and understandable to the Russian people, because even now it inspires them to fight against everything inert, insignificant and vile, for everything advanced, great and noble. The struggle between the new and the old is the law of our Russian life. The images created by Griboyedov, his apt, striking sayings, living in popular speech, are still capable of serving as a sharp weapon of satire.

Film adaptation of the story